Dismissed

K R Ramaswamy Alias Traffic Ramasamy(Deceased) v. Gnanadesigan

Madras HC4 Jul 2022CONT P/1152/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court found that CCTV footage confirmed respondents' compliance with the prior order halting hawking on NSC Bose Road. Petitions were closed; the Court discharged contemnors, directed continued operation of monitoring cameras, and granted liberty for future breaches.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Petition and Writ Petition closed; contemnors discharged; liberty granted for future enforcement.

K R Ramaswamy Alias Traffic Ramasamy(Deceased) Vs… — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 04.07.2022

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.MUNISHWAR NATH BHANDARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA

¶5

Contempt Petition No.1152 of 2016 &

¶6

Writ Petition No.16255 of 2018

¶7

K.R.Ramaswamy alias

¶8

Traffic Ramaswamy (Deceased) Vaikunth Kasthurirangan ...Petitioner in both

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.Gnanadesigan Chief Secretary to Government Fort St. George, Chennai 9.

¶11

2.Pannendra Reddy Secretary to Government Municipal Administration Department Fort St. George, Chennai 9.

¶12

3.Vikram Kapoor Commissioner Corporation of Chennai Rippon Buildings, Chennai 3.

¶13

4.T.K.Rajendran

¶14

Commissioner of Police Greater Chennai City Vepery, Chennai 7.

¶15

5.Abey Kumar Singh Additional Commissioner of Police Chennai City Traffic, Chennai City Vepery, Chennai 7.

¶16

...Respondents in Contempt Petition

¶17

1.The Chief Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu2 Secretariat, St. George Fort Chennai 600 009. 2.The Secretary Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, St. George Fort Chennai 600 009. 3.The Commissioner Chennai Corporation Greater Chennai Corporation Rippon Buildings, Chennai 3. 4.The Commissioner of Police EVR High Road, Vepery Chennai 600 008. 5.The Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic) EVR High Road, Vepery Chennai 600 008. 6.Assistant Revenue Officer - Zone 5 Corporation of Chennai Basin Bridge Road Chennai 79. 7.Zonal Officer - Zone 5 Corporation of Chennai Basin Bridge Road, Chennai 79. ...Respondents in W.P.

¶18

Prayer : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for willful disobedience and violation of the order dated 13.10.2015 made in W.P.No.32622 of 2015.

¶19

Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a writ of Mandamus to cancel / revoke the license to do vending activity / identify card issued by the Chennai Corporation to the illegal hawkers / encroachers at NSC Bose Road against the orders of this Court in W.P.No.32622 of 2015 and Cont.P.No.1152 of 2016.

¶20

For the Petitioner : Mr.S.Ganesan For the Respondents : Mr.J.Ravindran Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr.A.Selvendran Special Government Pleader for RR 1,2,4 & 5 in Cont.P. & WP

¶21

Mr.K.Raja Srinivas Standing Counsel for R3 in Cont.P. & WP for R6 & R7 in WP

¶22

ORDER

¶23

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶24

A perusal of the CCTV footage in Court would show that the respondents have not permitted any hawking in NSC Bose Road, in compliance of the order. Thus, compliance has been made.

¶25

It is submitted that the exercise taken by the respondents in not allowing hawking in NSC Bose Road may continue for sometime and it may recur in the future. Therefore, the additional CCTV cameras installed by the respondents should continue to operate and should be regularly monitored by the Commissioner, Chennai Corporation and the Inspector of Police concerned to ensure that no hawking is permitted in NSC Bose Road, which is declared to be a non hawking zone.

¶26

In view of the above, while closing the petition, a liberty is given to seek revival of the contempt or to file a fresh writ petition, in case hawking takes place in the future.

¶27

With the aforesaid order and with a direction to the respondents to continue the operation of additional security cameras, this contempt petition is closed. The contemnors are discharged. Sub.A.No.256 of 2019 is closed.

¶28

As regards the writ petition, since the illegal hawkers were removed, nothing survives and accordingly, the writ petition is closed. There will be no order as to costs. Consequently, WMP Nos.19358 and 21907 of 2018 are also closed.

¶29

// True Copy //

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

kpl

¶32

¶33

1.The Chief Secretary Government of Tamil Nadu, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai 600 009. 2.The Secretary Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department Government of Tamil Nadu Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai 600 009. 3.The Commissioner Chennai Corporation Greater Chennai Corporation Rippon Buildings, Chennai 3. 4.The Commissioner of Police EVR High Road, Vepery Chennai 600 008. 5.The Additional Commissioner of Police (Traffic) EVR High Road, Vepery Chennai 600 008. 6.Assistant Revenue Officer - Zone 5 Corporation of Chennai Basin Bridge Road Chennai 79.

¶34

7.Zonal Officer - Zone 5 Corporation of Chennai Basin Bridge Road, Chennai 79.

¶35

Cont.P.No. 1152 of 2016 & W.P.No.16255 of 2018

¶36

JPL(CO) RVM(21/07/2022)

K R Ramaswamy Alias Traffic Ramasamy(Deceased) v. Gnanadesigan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K R Ramaswamy Alias Traffic Ramasamy(Deceased) v. Gnanadesigan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kotturpuram Youth Forum Vs Rajesh Lakhoni

N.Ramalingam Vs The Addl Secretary to

S.Harshanasabari Vs The Authorised officer

G.Selvarajan Vs M.S.Santhosh

K.Sarbudeen Vs The District Collector

Ayyaa Vs State of Tamil Nadu